Welcome

Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

This is appalling even is this area ! I live in an Ozark Mountain Town , We all know there are HIV people and children here , as there are all over the world ! My Sister has been a teacher for 35 years , She now has twenty years in as a director of a high end Child Day care center in Southern Connecticut . I asked her one time about HIV / AIDS children , as she said they had a child that had a bleeding disease at that time . My sister's answer was WE TREAT ALL BABIES AND CHILDREN AT OUR CENTERS AS IF THEY HAVE HIV / AIDS ! She went on to say : " We could never ask a person if they had HIV or any other questions that are a breach of civil rights " If all precautions are taken for all children then the chance of transmission is nil . I'm proud when I see that in our Missouri area HIV in school children , Although HIV may get a comment here and there , For the most part is considered just part of life . At some point School leaders must be taught that facts ! HIV does not spread by sitting next to another child or playing sports .

Just returned to the Ryan White era. Being positive during that period was horrid, as the comments I witnessed were frightful. My family and friends didn't even realize they were talking about me at the time.

I expect the community will rally around these students as I truly believe the majority of folk have transformed their mindset about HIV.

If a suit is needed, then sue the person or persons responsible for this decision, not the school -- as suing the school equals suing the taxpayers who didn't make this decision.

Personally, I'd rather see the decision maker(s) fired. Everything is about a lawsuit -- I'd be ok if it is a suit to get a decision reversed, but not one for money. Taxpayers will be paying one way or the other, so let's minimize that.

You need not agree -- but do you think these folks ran on a platform of barring HIV+ children? Do you think the voters knew that was going to be their "policy"? Furthermore, what punishment does hitting a taxpayer's pocket impose on the imbecile(s) who did this? None at all.

As voters it is our responsibility to not only research WHO and WHAT we are voting for, but to also hold the elected officials accountable. If a candidate is a raging bigot that should come up during the election process.

As voters it is our responsibility to not only research WHO and WHAT we are voting for, but to also hold the elected officials accountable. If a candidate is a raging bigot that should come up during the election process.

Bob and I do our homework when it comes to voting , Luckily we are in a Democratic enclave

Seems like the same Nuts are reelected year after year

We voted in a Dem . Police Chief , He is with out a doubt a REPUBLICAN in sheep's clothing !

I have changed over the years , I now use my GMHC name labels I get from supporting the group My bad , I mail them from a town 10 miles away , But my mail still says FIGHT AIDS on it The more people know the less harm can be created !

Have we forgot about Ryan White went through so other kid would not have to? This is a outrage! These poor kid! In my opinion whoever made this decision and broke the law should be held accountable. As for taking money away from the school I call BS it will be the town(s) that belong to the district that may get fined for breaking the law or have to pay out to an civil suits that may by filed. I would think that the school district or town that belong to this district are insured for situations like this. Anyhow...

As voters it is our responsibility to not only research WHO and WHAT we are voting for, but to also hold the elected officials accountable. If a candidate is a raging bigot that should come up during the election process.

I completely agree!! voters should hold people accountable (though I don't think, as you seem to suggest, that they should be mind readers too). However, how does suing taxpayers hold the elected officials accountable for anything at all?

If there is a lawsuit (for money) against the school system or town, any payout comes from the taxes collected. So who suffers? The students, who couldn't vote, who may have to go without some "elective" activities. The town residents - whether they voted for the idiots or not, who now face cutbacks in services. The town employees who may face layoffs. NOT THE OFFICIALS. That is the point I am trying to make.

As for taking money away from the school I call BS it will be the town(s) that belong to the district that may get fined for breaking the law or have to pay out to an civil suits that may by filed. I would think that the school district or town that belong to this district are insured for situations like this.

Honestly -- I don't understand this mindset at all!?!? Assuming there is insurance, now we are making an even wider group of people pay the price. Not to mention, the increase in insurance premiums WILL come from taxes. There is no such thing as a free meal -- someone, somewhere pays for it. If you are going to sue over something, you need to ensure that you are suing the folks you wish to punish -- not taxpayers, not insurers -- the perpetrators. It isn't that hard of a concept, really.

"Today, Disability Rights Center of Arkansas, Inc. (DRC) issued a demand letter to the Arkansas Department of Human Services addressing the Pea Ridge School Districtís recent ultimatum that three students undergo HIV testing before returning to school. The demand letter also urges that the results of the test not be given to the Pea Ridge School District. The release of HIV testing records to school districts by the state is a violation of federal law. Additionally, the Pea Ridge School Districtís demand that the studentís test results be received prior to returning to school is a violation of federal law."

Here's the DHS formal response, from its attorney.

"It says the state, as custodian of the children, is required to give all known information, including disabilities and health information, about them to the school district."

Dear Mike,I hear where you are coming from but I don't think you are seeing the bigger picture.Sometimes it takes a lawsuit in one community to nip this attitude in the bud. It has national implications. So be it. Agreed?

PS- If it costs these tax payers money for hiring these idiots so be it. We all are part of this nation and the burden on this community will show others of like mind that this is not acceptable.

Dear Mike,I hear where you are coming from but I don't think you are seeing the bigger picture.Sometimes it takes a lawsuit in one community to nip this attitude in the bud. It has national implications. So be it. Agreed?

PS- If it costs these tax payers money for hiring these idiots so be it. We all are part of this nation and the burden on this community will show others of like mind that this is not acceptable.

We need to stand up for what we believe in no matter what the price.

I do not think I am missing the bigger picture at all. I agree that there are national implications.

Why must it cost the taxpayers?? Why not sue the individuals who are responsible? You nip nothing in the bud if you "punish" the wrong people. Putting the consequences on the public does nothing, IMHO.

I do not think I am missing the bigger picture at all. I agree that there are national implications.

Why must it cost the taxpayers?? Why not sue the individuals who are responsible? You nip nothing in the bud if you "punish" the wrong people. Putting the consequences on the public does nothing, IMHO.

M

I still see your point and hope that it can be solved so the people at fault get punished but sometimes a bigger slap is needed to make a loud statement across the country. A lawsuit against the school board (taxpayers) might be just the ticket to prevent other communties from following in their footprint.A lawsuit against a few people doesn't get the message across strongly enough.

This might be the only way to send a clear message to other communities that this will not be tolerated. Sue 2 or 3 people, who cares. Not loud enough.

After Ryan White lived these horrors 25 years ago or so it astounds me that this can happen in 2013. Act up!!!

Again, how does hitting the taxpayers -- or removing money that would be used for students do anything at all to alleviate any pain and suffering??

I am always amazed how people want to "stick it to the man" don't realize who "the man" really is at the end of the day.

If a lawsuit is brought forward, and I am sure that it will be -- and maybe should be -- then I hope it is limited to the people who made this decision and not the school system or the town.

M

My point wasn't about getting rich. I was talking about money to see therapists, to possibly switch to a private or public school in another county, which would mean moving. And, there is pain and suffering. I doubt they could sue individual people and get much at all. Going by the logic that it would hurt taxpayers and that isn't fair, suing individual people would hurt their innocent family members. They may have to sell their home, cars, etc to come up with the funds. Their kids would be homeless. I'm not saying they shouldn't sue individuals, but I doubt they'd get enough for even therapy visits.

When someone is prosecuted, convicted, and served years in prison for a crime they didn't commit, should they sue the county, or should they sue the prosecutors, the jurors, and the judge? There was just two stories of two black men, who were prosecuted for rape here. The evidence was so flimsy. They ignored so much evidence to the contrary. Both men served about 10 years each. They both sued the city of Louisville and got about $8 million each. There's no way they would have gotten much from suing the individuals, who hid and dismissed evidence to the contrary. I get what you're saying about punishing those responsible, but I just don't think it is realistic to get much out of individuals. It the same with corporations. If scientists for a company hid harmful effects of a product, people sue the corporation usually, even if the company wasn't aware of what their employees were doing.

But, back to the main point, this is just extremely sad they have to go through this. From what I read, there is no proof they are actually poz?? Just suspicion, right? Even if they are neg, the damage has been done. I'm sure they will always be referred to as the kids with AIDS.

So if our local school board did this, I, as a gay hiv positive man, should be held financially responsible? Lawsuits to stop actions is one thing, but to gain monetarily at the expense of innocents is beyond my comprehension.

I will never understand the desire, to be enriched, due to the mistakes of others. In this case, a cease and desist order would do the trick and if the family involved, has incurred expenses, then they should be covered, but nothing more. This idea that every time anyone is wronged, that they should receive a "windfall" of money is absurd.

If nothing else, a large settlement in this case, will not hurt the taxpayers half as much as the decreased funding for education will hurt their children.

I'm not trying to put in the last word on the topic but I just can't let it stand the way it was ended.I usually agree with you both on most issues but this confounds me in many ways.

First of all, I'm not sure what the laws are in AK but in CT individuals of a school board are exempt from personal law suits.

Next,These families have been harmed. I have NEVER been a "sue happy" person but sometimes it is necessary.

What surprises me most is that you both choose to express greater concern about the tax payers and possible cuts in education of the community that elected these idiots than you do for the families involved and families around the country. Ok, maybe that is an overstatement but what kind of message does it send across our nation. F*ck Ryan White?

The phrase "nip it in the bud" means to me harsh measures are needed.

The discrimination in our lives for being gay has been a burden that we need to still fight for let alone the hiv part of the equation.

So, maybe a lawsuit that sends a clear message that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated, even if it raises the taxes in this community and harms the education (which I sincerely doubt will happen) is needed to not only compensate the families, to a reasonable degree I hope whatever that means, but will put a stop to this madness.

Sometimes the way things work in this country make me cringe too but on the same token we cannot loose site of how our society needs to change. The system sucks. IMHO this fight is worth the lawsuit and consequences.

Try to put yourself in the shoes of the foster family of one of these kids. They probably have many family members and friends that love them. The impact of this decision on the child in the years to come staying in this community might be too much to bare.

Sometimes the repercussions on a local level are less important than our society as a whole.

Think about it.If we thought that way all along we would have not taken the steps to get where we are today.

Sorry to get so hyped up but this really is an important topic. I hope you both don't take any offense but I'm sticking to my deepest beliefs with this one.

I'm not trying to put in the last word on the topic but I just can't let it stand the way it was ended.I usually agree with you both on most issues but this confounds me in many ways.

First of all, I'm not sure what the laws are in AK but in CT individuals of a school board are exempt from personal law suits.

Next,These families have been harmed. I have NEVER been a "sue happy" person but sometimes it is necessary.

What surprises me most is that you both choose to express greater concern about the tax payers and possible cuts in education of the community that elected these idiots than you do for the families involved and families around the country. Ok, maybe that is an overstatement but what kind of message does it send across our nation. F*ck Ryan White?

The phrase "nip it in the bud" means to me harsh measures are needed.

The discrimination in our lives for being gay has been a burden that we need to still fight for let alone the hiv part of the equation.

So, maybe a lawsuit that sends a clear message that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated, even if it raises the taxes in this community and harms the education (which I sincerely doubt will happen) is needed to not only compensate the families, to a reasonable degree I hope whatever that means, but will put a stop to this madness.

Sometimes the way things work in this country make me cringe too but on the same token we cannot loose site of how our society needs to change. The system sucks. IMHO this fight is worth the lawsuit and consequences.

Try to put yourself in the shoes of the foster family of one of these kids. They probably have many family members and friends that love them. The impact of this decision on the child in the years to come staying in this community might be too much to bare.

Sometimes the repercussions on a local level are less important than our society as a whole.

Think about it.If we thought that way all along we would have not taken the steps to get where we are today.

Sorry to get so hyped up but this really is an important topic. I hope you both don't take any offense but I'm sticking to my deepest beliefs with this one.

Sincerely,Mark

Quoted because I entirely agree.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

A - I do not care more about taxpayers than these 3 kids. That is why I have been saying a lawsuit to overturn this decision is what the focus should be.

B - If anyone thinks that politicians will "get the message" because of a civil suit to the town / school system, well, you haven't been reading the news for the last century or more. Idiot politicians will continue to be idiots. Sure, sometimes voters know they are idiots and vote for them (like my US Rep - Cantor -- who I have NEVER voted for), but I doubt they ran their campaign on keeping these kids out of school.

All I see in this talk of a civil suit is vengeance (because, IMO, the "message" you all want to send isn't going to be received by the people who need to hear it). Great, I understand why people feel that way. However money isn't going to make any stigma these kids may face go away and the ultimate recipients of this vengeance will be the school kids who lose out on monies that should be allocated for them.

So -- Mitch, you know I love you -- but we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one, but please know that I DO CARE about these kids. I simply have a different view on how to help them.

A - I do not care more about taxpayers than these 3 kids. That is why I have been saying a lawsuit to overturn this decision is what the focus should be.

B - If anyone thinks that politicians will "get the message" because of a civil suit to the town / school system, well, you haven't been reading the news for the last century or more. Idiot politicians will continue to be idiots. Sure, sometimes voters know they are idiots and vote for them (like my US Rep - Cantor -- who I have NEVER voted for), but I doubt they ran their campaign on keeping these kids out of school.

All I see in this talk of a civil suit is vengeance (because, IMO, the "message" you all want to send isn't going to be received by the people who need to hear it). Great, I understand why people feel that way. However money isn't going to make any stigma these kids may face go away and the ultimate recipients of this vengeance will be the school kids who lose out on monies that should be allocated for them.

So -- Mitch, you know I love you -- but we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one, but please know that I DO CARE about these kids. I simply have a different view on how to help them.

Hugs,mike

Well, first of all I would like to say I love you too dear.

I know you care about these kids but the bulk of all of your posts in this thread focused squarely on your concerns for the taxpayers, not the harm inflicted to these families (barely mentioned). I also know you want to help these kids and have a different point of view.

I do wonder however if you ever can see the justification of a civil law suit that ends up costing innocent people money. Ted brought up some excellent examples that I would like to expand upon.

If a scumbag police officer intentionally falsified evidence that led to false imprisonment and the truth came out after spending a decade in prison should the person be compensated? You know it happens and the taxpayers are on the hook. It's simply a case of an individual (police officer) that blatantly disregarded the law and harmed someone by his actions. Sure, he might end up in prison but what about the guy who lost 10 years of his life in prison for a crime he did not commit? Compensation for this guy ends up costing the taxpayers. Not fair to the taxpayers maybe but that's the way our legal system works.

If a corporation is sued in a civil case for blatantly ignoring a law that caused harm to it's customers should they be compensated? It happens all the time and the "innocent" share holders that didn't know this crap was even going on end up paying the price. Again, it's another example of the innocent getting shafted. Not fair to the share holders but what about the harm done?

I realize punitive damages can get out of hand and it irks me when that happens. Like I said, sometimes the system sucks.

The decision made by this superintendent went against current law. It will be overturned. So, that's the end of the story? Everyone lives happily ever after? I'm thinking no.

Mike, I guess we will have to agree to disagree. You see this as vengeance and I see needed and just compensation (not a windfall, but a fair and equitable amount that will be decided by a jury or judge).How much harm was done? We really don't know yet.

I know you care about these kids but the bulk of all of your posts in this thread focused squarely on your concerns for the taxpayers, not the harm inflicted to these families (barely mentioned). I also know you want to help these kids and have a different point of view.

I do wonder however if you ever can see the justification of a civil law suit that ends up costing innocent people money. Ted brought up some excellent examples that I would like to expand upon.

If a scumbag police officer intentionally falsified evidence that led to false imprisonment and the truth came out after spending a decade in prison should the person be compensated? You know it happens and the taxpayers are on the hook. It's simply a case of an individual (police officer) that blatantly disregarded the law and harmed someone by his actions. Sure, he might end up in prison but what about the guy who lost 10 years of his life in prison for a crime he did not commit? Compensation for this guy ends up costing the taxpayers. Not fair to the taxpayers maybe but that's the way our legal system works.

If a corporation is sued in a civil case for blatantly ignoring a law that caused harm to it's customers should they be compensated? It happens all the time and the "innocent" share holders that didn't know this crap was even going on end up paying the price. Again, it's another example of the innocent getting shafted. Not fair to the share holders but what about the harm done?

I realize punitive damages can get out of hand and it irks me when that happens. Like I said, sometimes the system sucks.

The decision made by this superintendent went against current law. It will be overturned. So, that's the end of the story? Everyone lives happily ever after? I'm thinking no.

Mike, I guess we will have to agree to disagree. You see this as vengeance and I see needed and just compensation (not a windfall, but a fair and equitable amount that will be decided by a jury or judge).How much harm was done? We really don't know yet.

Hugs,Mitch

Hey Mitch,

I think you may have missed my comment about the parents being awarded whatever damages are appropriate. My issue was solely with the idea that a multi-million dollar award was justified, when we simply don't know enough to make that determination. I also do not find it helpful to include examples of criminal behaviour, as this case involves civil matters only. Comparing apples to oranges does nothing to clarify this issue and I have faith that the courts will reach an equitable resolution to this matter.

I think you may have missed my comment about the parents being awarded whatever damages are appropriate. My issue was solely with the idea that a multi-million dollar award was justified, when we simply don't know enough to make that determination. I also do not find it helpful to include examples of criminal behaviour, as this case involves civil matters only. Comparing apples to oranges does nothing to clarify this issue and I have faith that the courts will reach an equitable resolution to this matter.

Joe

Hi Joe,

I agree with you completely that this should not be a windfall but I also believe reasonable punitive damages might be appropriate. We really don't know. You limited it to "expenses occurred" in your comment. Maybe you meant something more?

As far as the cases I sighted, I was specifically talking about civil cases, not criminal (although the criminal aspects were also involved in my examples). Maybe not the perfect analogy but it is still comparing apples to apples when it comes to the civil cases.

I ask again, is it ever appropriate for a civil case to proceed if innocent people end up paying for others mistakes? My answer is yes as unfortunate as it is.

Ignoring the law by elected officials who are most likely safe from personal lawsuits still demands reasonable compensation of parties harmed by their actions. It might bring more outrage from a community if they know the consequences. I wonder if the community involved here is willing to pay hefty fines for non-compliance of an existing law?

I sincerely hope for the families involved that this all ends well without much trauma but if not, I am steadfast in my beliefs on the issue of fair and equitable compensation no matter who it ends up costing in this instance. It sends a signal no matter who chooses to hear it or not.

You are right, I should have been clearer in my response. I believe the family deserves their expenses to be covered, as well as punitive damages, for what has occurred. Maybe I was confused, but I thought some here were supporting additional damages, against the school board, over and above what the family deserves and I just don't see that part as preventing this from happening in the future.

It is sad that the school board members are exempt from consequences in a civil suit. Power without appropriate checks and balances tends to being out the worst in some people.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

If the school board district is sued, so be it. As I understand, most if not all School board districts have some sort of insurance policy's to cover lawsuits. And almost a certainty, the insurance company will inform the school board in changes to avoid these losses again.

I here people when they say we need to to be sue happy in this country and I completely agree it is time to rework some of our Torts.

The is a distinct difference in cases. I'm sure that most everyone here in the US will notice that warning that now appears on a coffee cup that warn someone their hot coffee is hot. Right? This is one of those law suits that I think should of never happened. Yes your hot coffee is hot and if you spill it on you may get burnt. common sense if ask me.

However, in the above case it is more involved, in my opinion, is the type of case that, if someone is liable for discrimination or negligence the case your be made.

IDK. First we need to know more information of what happened, when, and why. Not knowing all the fact makes it hard. Here is what they are suppose to follow:

Punitive damages are to punish wrong doers. In this case, the innocent tax payers would fit the bill. When elected officials do wrong, they are acting out of the scope of their duties. It's reasonable to believe that when we elect school officials, they will not break local, state or federal laws.